-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 68
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
wrong binary-relation #5
Comments
what should it be? |
I think it should be _subj(do, he) , right? |
Well, that can't be right: because then the meaning becomes "he is doing Compare to: "He is afraid of goats."
I conclude the correct answer is:
|
By the way, this is an example of a curious linguistic phenomenon, the "null subject" in English. The dependent clause "doing too much" doesn't have a subject. In English, the dominant clause always has a subject, and so relex gets confused, and assigns one. However, in English, dependent clauses can have null subjects: the implied subject is indeed "he", which is why you wrote " _subj(do, he)" -- in a certain way, you were correct. The problem with your answer is that, if used to generate a new sentence, it would generate "he is doing too much, he is afraid". The of(afraid,doing) is critical to get it right. Now that I think about it, the correct answer is to generate both _subj(do, he) and of(afraid, goat). For more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null-subject_language |
For the sentence "He is afraid of doing too much." the relex output is
Dependency relations:
_predadj(he, afraid)
_obj(do, much)
_subj(do, of)
_advmod(much, too)
_subj(do, of) is wrong.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: